If you just wanna talk; please, skip the wall of text and start with the numbered questions. If you want to argue/debate, you should probably read the whole thing (sorry) .

---

Hi everyone, I'd like to start an open discussion. Seems to me that many people don't really understand how the media could possibly be so corrupt, and how that corruption could actually affect the masses. I'd like to get people talking about it, because there are some huge falsehoods floating around these days on the topic of big-news corps. I'm gonna try and provide a theoretical example, and you people can tear it down, or build it up as you see fit.

As per usual with these things, I pretty much need to have a wall of disclaimers to leave as little room for fallacious argument as possible. I'm sorry about this extra reading, but it's the only way I have found to cut down on people misdirecting the point, and using straw-man logic to invalidate an entire topic of discussion. This happened endlessly on reddit, and it sickens me to the core.

to be clear, the point of this post is to help each other learn to discus a topic's viability, without accepting the pretense as fact.

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -Aristotle

---

A few assumptions that I'll be treating like facts for the sake of this discussion:

- Mainstream news media is fundamentally compromised. If you need more evidence on this, just research CNN (or fox, or msnbc, ect) and who they've been getting money from, potentially in exchange for opinion pieces.

- It is the goal of the mainstream media; not to mislead the people, but to say in business. The MSM is not evil, simply amoral. There is no room for morality (including immorality) on a board of directors that report to their stock-holders. Their morality is simply utilitarianism, with money replacing the concept of "good." It just so happens the only people that still give them money have some very particular interests and goals, so they mirror those interests.

- The MSM likely do not manufacture news, but they do report manufactured/unreliable stories. They certainly have reported on things that didn't happen at all, but (I believe) this is a symptom of being tricked as badly as people that watch the news at home. It would be really easy to get 4 people to independently contact a reporter and claim they all saw X or Y.

---

With these assumptions in mind, lets dive in, conversational and leading questions follow:

1 Has anyone else noticed the shift in the media from focusing on improvised-black crime, to focusing on illegal-alien Latino crime?

2 Has anyone noticed the complete lack of verifiable evidence supporting an abnormal surge in violence? (If you have some good evidence, please share, I've been looking for newer numbers with no success.)

3 Can anyone think of a certain big-business candidate for president that is (rather confusingly) gaining political traction by speaking out against this (potentially) manufactured trend of violence? (This is barely a real question, but I really don't like putting words in mouths.)

4 Is it reaching too far to say this has been done in every election since Nixon (and maybe even before that)?